  andybPremium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1 | Its true Exchange between reporter and industry minister on twitter
"@TonyClement_MP
Tony Clement
True. CRTC must go back to drawing board RT @RosieBarton is it true you will overturn internet decision if crtc does not back down?" | |
|
 |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit |  Re: Its true
said by andyb:Exchange between reporter and industry minister on twitter
"@TonyClement_MP
Tony Clement
True. CRTC must go back to drawing board RT @RosieBarton is it true you will overturn internet decision if crtc does not back down?"
News item on this exchange:
»news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110203/wr_···internet
"True. CRTC must go back to the drawing board," Clement wrote late Wednesday when asked whether he would overturn the decision if the regulator does not back down.
»twitter.com/#!/TonyClement_MP
# True. CRTC must go back to drawing board RT
@RosieBarton is it true you will overturn internet decision if crtc does not back down? about 1 hour ago via Twitterrific
# I remain very concerned by the #UBB decision of the CRTC & look forward to my review being completed ASAP. about 5 hours ago via Twitterrific
# I'm looking forward to the CRTC chairman's appearance before the House Industry Cttee tomorrow to explain his support for #UBB decision. about 5 hours ago via Twitterrific
# Recorded interview with Radio NL Kamloops BC on #UBB! about 10 hours ago via Twitterrific
| |
|
 KommiePremium
join:2003-05-13
united state
kudos:2 |  Good
| |
|
| | | Re: Good @Kommie -- Don't hold your breath... | |
|
| | KommiePremium
join:2003-05-13
united state
kudos:2 | Re: Good I got hopes for you guys up north. Multi-party Democracy with some great ones like the NDP. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
 ·eyesurf
| Re: Good said by Kommie:I got hopes for you guys up north. Multi-party Democracy with some great ones like the NDP.
We in Canada are so progressive, we have both Liberals (garden-variety Democrats) and something called the NEW DEMOCRATIC party (even more progressive!)
In our Con minority, this keeps them in check. | |
|
| andybPremium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by Kommie:Wow a Government that works for the people!
Not really.They needed to be pushed.Plus its not over yet | |
|
| | | The Conservatives aren't dumb. They know an election isn't too far away, and if UBB has left a sour taste in people's mouths they're going to lose big time. So I question whether this isn't just an election ploy. | |
|
| | |
| |  GbcueAlmost P.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| said by andrewhaji:The Conservatives aren't dumb. They know an election isn't too far away, and if UBB has left a sour taste in people's mouths they're going to lose big time. So I question whether this isn't just an election ploy.
Doesn't really matter, those who benefit are still the people.
--
My Blog 2.2 | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| That's THE ENTIRE POINT. Doing things so that your constituents like you and vote for you again. This is how all politics should work, rather than having big business lobby be the boss.
EVERY politician should think about every decision they make and whether the voters will approve. Any politician who doesn't isn't doing their job, and good riddance to them. | |
|
| | | I feel fairly confident that the FCC or the government would atleast tell ISP to stop any UBB. However, I feel slightly more confident that ISPs would file a lawsuit saying "you're over stepping your bounds, ROFLMAO and leave me and my monies alone, kthxbye." and that republicans (along with anyone else that has been BRIBED by the communication industry to see thing 'their' way. so not necessarily just republicans) will jump on with support for the ISPs. | |
|
| | |
| | Canadian Government To Overturn Usage-Billing Rules It must be a miracle, i wonder what devious plan Bell has next now that the decision has been reversed? | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Canadian Government To Overturn Usage-Billing Rules said by chuckcar :It must be a miracle, i wonder what devious plan Bell has next now that the decision has been reversed?
They come up with plans with a little higher cap and little lower overages until they get one the government can live with. | |
|
| | | | Re: Canadian Government To Overturn Usage-Billing Rules Theyll come up with a "connection fee" or something to that effect, as they do with cell phones. If they cant grab more cash one way, they'll do it another | |
|
| | | andybPremium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1 | Re: Canadian Government To Overturn Usage-Billing Rules Sorta like the "EGG management fee" commercial lol | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·voip.ms
| said by BF69:said by chuckcar :It must be a miracle, i wonder what devious plan Bell has next now that the decision has been reversed?
They come up with plans with a little higher cap and little lower overages until they get one the government can live with. Exactly, they in fact learned this trick from the Canadian government when they first introduced the GST back in 1991.
This was a few governments ago mind you, but the big incumbents are nothing if not students of political history I find.
To wit:
Float the percentage that the new tax is going to be set at and make it as darn close to the old hidden tax (Manufacturer's Sales Tax which was 13.5%) as they dared, "listen" to the outrage, dial it back a couple of percentage points, in this case 7% and say you "listened to the people" while siphoning off the cash 
NefCanuck | |
|
 AkFubarNothing is more constant than change
join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN. | It Was a Great Push! | |
|
|
Ncrdrg
join:2011-01-25
Brossard, QC | And we finally won That's certainly great news!
Now I just hope the CRTC doesn't just pull back and do an half-hearted review to piss everyone off. | |
|
| | @ all This is good news for Canada, not so good for the U.S. We will always be last place when it comes to internet connectivity, and pricing. As long as big business is in control of the government and policies that favor their agenda. Its nice to see a government that's working for its people and not their pockets. | |
|
| andybPremium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1 | Re: @ all What do you mean?Every study I have seen has the US ahead of Canada in price/speed | |
|
| |
| | |
| | | Reviews:
·voip.ms
1 edit | Re: @ all I do note that there are in fact very legitimate sources for network TV
IE: The TV networks own websites, here in Canada and in the US and sports (NFL.com etc.) or NetFlix and Internet radio (including local stations)
Of course pushing all this data will cost the ISP's money, but guess what? They don't pay a kings ransom to transmit the data over equipment that is already bought & paid for a million times over and it's not like they are rushing out to provide new faster technolgies either.
It is quite possible to "cut the cord" and be 100% legit and frankly that's where I'm leaning towards more & more given the ever rising costs of cable TV if UBB dies the horrible painful death that it deserves (but I'm not about to give it last rites, I trust Bell up here about as far as I can throw them)
NefCanuck | |
|
| | | |
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | | Re: @ all 10/1 for $50/month is inflated. Cable companies need to start upgrading to DOCSIS 3 with all the profit they make. It'd be great if the FCC reclassified all ISPs as common carrier. With independents line-sharing on coax lines you'd see your prices drop dramatically. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: @ all not really as they'd still have to wholesale the lines from someone. The CableCo's would still make out. They'd price their services LESS than the wholesale ISP and charge them their retail rates on a per customer basis the same as ATT and VZ do with DSL.
MSOs have more $$$ to fight the FCC and the FCC and NOT touch the Internet. That's their problem. If they could get their guidelines and policies rewritten/given the power to them they could. But as its stands now. any thing they do with the Internet is touching a fine line and they know it. | |
|
|  DragasoniWe're All Mad HerePremium
join:2001-12-14
Palm Bay, FL | Thanks for removing another one of my posts for NO reason. As a paid premium member, I deserve better than this.
-Dragasoni- | |
|
| | Good I'm glad to hear this. Even though I'm not in Canada, I felt that the US ISPs would have found out what the ISPs in Canada were doing and try it with us. Netflix just won't allow a 25gb cap! | |
|
| | | Re: Good For my fellow Canadians, this is indeed great news. It's also a very rare occurrence that any Govt. will overturn a CRTC decision. I can only remember this happening a handful of times in the past. Is it an election ploy? maybe? But I really dont think so. | |
|
| | JBear
join:2005-02-24
canada | Re: Good Yeah but as others have said, Bell will just come up with another way to gouge customers. If UBB was reasonably priced, I could see how some people could be interested in it, while others, not so much. | |
|
 sm5w2
join:2004-10-13
St Thomas, ON | Was UBB manufactured as a political tool? I thought that no decision is made by the CRTC without approval (or meddling) by cabinet.
If so, then the original decision to approve UBB doesn't make sense.
The federal cabinet knew for months that UBB was coming down the pipe. How can they claim otherwise?
Was all of this manufactured?
Was the intent all along to have the CRTC foist UBB onto canadians, and let Harper ride in on a white horse and save the day?
I can't believe that Bell would let itself get played for a sucker like this. | |
|
| |
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Overturn? LOL! How do you all figure? It says if they do NOT reconsider or overturn the new rules, the Gov't will overturn the new rule itself. Nothing says that they can't just change the current new passed rules and make the PMs happy.
Everyone needs to fully read. NOTHING says they will TOTALLY 100% overturn these UBB Rules and Fees. Everyone's got their hopes up for nothing. In return you may have a higher cap but you'll still end up with UBB. | |
|
| | | Re: Overturn? Bell will likely respond by hiking rates and slowly whittling down the current caps they already have in place. The smaller ISP's with unlimited data might just keep them in check. | |
|
| | GbcueAlmost P.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Overturn? said by CableDude60 :Bell will likely respond by hiking rates and slowly whittling down the current caps they already have in place. The smaller ISP's with unlimited data might just keep them in check.
Ah yes, the true definition of competition.
--
My Blog 2.2 | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·eyesurf
| Re: Overturn? said by Gbcue:said by CableDude60 :Bell will likely respond by hiking rates and slowly whittling down the current caps they already have in place. The smaller ISP's with unlimited data might just keep them in check.
Ah yes, the true definition of competition. Yes. That's why even though TekSavvy holds less than 10% of market share, they are growing rapidly, and are actual competition to Bhell and Robbers. Reversing UBB allows TekSavvy to further erode the market share of the incumbents (good) or perhaps Bhell and Robbers can lower their prices! (also good.) | |
|
|  GonePremium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:1 | said by hottboiinnc:Everyone needs to fully read. NOTHING says they will TOTALLY 100% overturn these UBB Rules and Fees. Everyone's got their hopes up for nothing. In return you may have a higher cap but you'll still end up with UBB. So you guys on the other side of Lake Erie know something that we up here on the North Shore don't know?
The fact that this is turning into an election issue - an issue that parties will fight over to determine who is the next Prime Minister of Canada - means that there is a huge dynamic shift in what is going to happen. Bell will no longer be able to ask for anything they want and expect the CRTC to grant it. They know consumers won't stand for it, and the government won't allow Bell to continue a monopolistic approach like that. The very fact that this dynamic has shifted so drastically over the last few days, and how usage based billing has left such a bad taste in the mouths of Canadians, means that in order to preserve their own electability, the government won't let anything short of an elimination (or drastic, drastic, drastic reduction in costs) of UBB go forward.
Now having said that, my feeling is that we may end up with aggregated UBB - that is, a wholesaler is granted xGB a month per GAS subscriber. I expect that number to end up being far more than 25GB (probably far more than 60GB - I'm thinking 300GB) that Bell is proposing. The ISP must then pay a fee, and that fee will be nowhere near what Bell asked originally now that the public knows the true per-GB costs, over and above their entire usage as a wholesaler beyond the total amount of granted to them to all GAS subscribers. This allows Bell to save face by claiming that UBB is about traffic management and not profits, and allows ISPs to differentiate their products and services and taylor them to the specific segment of the market they're targeting. An wholesale ISP, for example, could offer an "unlimited" package knowing full well that the majority of their users don't go beyond the limit provided per GAS subscriber, and those that do go over the per-GAS amount end up using the unused portion of usage assigned to other GAS subscribers.
But, to simply think that they will change the numbers on this exact same ruling and expect it to go ahead is beyond naive. This is going to have a huge impact on the whole idea of usage based billing in Canada. Not just for GAS wholesalers, but for TPIA wholesalers and even right at the incumbent retail level as well. You can bet that any plans for further tightening of the UBB noose (Cogeco is planning some changes, for example) are either going to be put on hold or drastically altered now that this has occurred.
People say that Canadians don't get pissed off over stuff, and that is true to an extent. But when we do, we get REAL REAL pissed off, and have a way of turfing elected officials in a way that you guys down south could only dream of. | |
|
| | |
KC
join:2006-11-08
Ottawa, ON | I might have to take back things I said about Tony... If all this pans out and we get rid of UBB (all of it! Remember UBB started off life as throttling) Then I'm going to have to take back all the bad things I've said about Tony Clement. Let's hope there are no POISON PILL waiting for the indie ISPs.
BTW the ruling only affect indie ISPs (4% of the Canadian Market) The rest of the sheep are still getting fleeced. | |
|
| GonePremium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:1 | Re: I might have to take back things I said about Tony... said by KC:BTW the ruling only affect indie ISPs (4% of the Canadian Market) The rest of the sheep are still getting fleeced. ... for now, but since Bell now has no way to impose their retail model on wholesale ISPs, Bell will have to compete with diverse offerings provided by those indies. Bell started changing their own retail packages with the assumption that their own GAS UBB plans were going to be approved. Now that they're going to be smacked right down, Bell, Rogers, Telus, Cogeco et all are going to have no choice but to evaluate their own retail models as well, knowing full well that they can't enforce identical retail models on their competition.
This decision is just the start. You can bet that speed matching is going to be enforced by the "corrected" CRTC decision, and there are other tariffs, such as TPIA, that will feel the trickle down effects as well. This is a precedent setting decision that affects a whole plethory of wholesale tariffs that could drastically alter the retail market in this country. | |
|
 pfakBow before me for I am rootPremium
join:2002-12-29
Vancouver, BC | Keep in mind ... This development does not apply to Shaw, or Rogers. | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
| | Line-Sharing Pricing It would be nice if the government would also force the CRTC to lower the prices that the incumbents are allowed to charge to third party ISPs sharing the last mile. IIRC they charge $20/customer, which is way too high and is the reason there are so few independent ISPs. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
|
|  XT0RTS3x, Drugs, War
join:2001-07-28
Edmonton, AB | Re: if you want to watch INDU Meeting #54, correct?
--
First the UBB, now let's wait for Bill C-32. | |
|
| | |
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TELUS
| Y'all keep in mind The UBB decision had a very important ramification: If you were a business already paying for bandwidth in bulk from bell (Tariffed and regulated through G.A.S. established by the CRTC, thank you) and had established you own internet service provision thus and re-sold your bulk bandwidth to consumers as "unlimited packages" this law in effect, makes you charge an extra fee and pass it on to your customer, to then re-hand it to bell .
This is how you can clearly see it's nothing but a cash grab.
If bell wants to gouge it's own retail customers, so be it. But when they get the crts to regulate it as a measure to "control overuse" it's plain bullcrap. The "use" is prepaid and already metered for resellers (think Acanak and Teksavvy and etc...), you have to be blind and or stupid not to see it's anti competitive.
...or corrupt.
C'mon CRTC make your choice, I dare you.
--
Cheers! | |
|
| ErikRP
join:2004-11-06
Winnipeg, MB Reviews:
·Shaw
| Re: Y'all keep in mind Exactly, and this is a very important distinction. If you are a retail customer of Bell, Rogers, Shaw, or any other large ISP, the impending reversal of the CRTC decision means little on the face of it. The CRTC decision affected only reselling of bandwidth to smaller providers such as TekSavvy.
Essentially Bell was arguing that smaller ISPs were offering unlimited plans which was negatively affecting Bell, who wanted to be able to charge on a per GB basis. The CRTC agreed but said they could only do this if they were also charging their retail customers on the same basis. Essentially Bell was told if they want to bill TekSavvy on a per GB basis they have to do likewise for its retail customers. Which Bell was only to happy to introduce, since this has the potential to both generate revenue for those who have to have the bandwidth, and to stifle other customers into limiting how much they use their connection.
Rogers, Shaw, and others saw this as a golden opportunity to collude act similarly and so they too introduced UBB for their retail customers.
Now that the decision is being reversed, there is nothing forcing Bell to introduce UBB to its retail customers. Having said that, a reversal of the decision that means Bell cannot keep UBB for its retail customers.
This is where it will get interesting. Now that smaller ISPs like TekSavvy can once again offer unlimited plans, will this be enough competition to force the larger companies to scrap UBB? We shall soon see. Unfortunately my money is betting that the larger ISPs try and promote their faster speeds, better service, bundled packages, etc., as being worth the pain of UBB. How many consumers will buy that argument is the $64,000 question.
Personally, I'd like to see TekSavvy and others get absolutely swamped with order from customers who are fleeing the big ISPs. This might be the only way to get realistic pricing on internet service in Canada.
The only other hope is for the CRTC to not only reverse the decision but to go further and require that the larger ISPs offer unlimited packages to its customers. Admittedly this is a long shot, especially as the CRTC is not known for making up its policy on a whim. However given the attitude of the government and how quickly they reacted - when was the last time the federal government got involved in an issue AND acted this quickly? - it makes me wonder if there might be some additional surprise in store for consumers.
Canadians live in hope...! | |
|
| | | | Re: Y'all keep in mind Now if we can only make them see how traffic shaping of 3rd party ISPs is just a slice of the same pie...
--
Cheers! | |
|
|
Reviews:
·eyesurf
|  Republicans in Canada
Only if perhaps the CRTC becomes an elected body, would they care to listen to we the people. | |
|
| XT0RTS3x, Drugs, War
join:2001-07-28
Edmonton, AB | Re: Republicans in Canada I'm watching ParlVU now on the matter. Let's see what happens less then 1.5 hours from now.
--
First the UBB, now let's wait for Bill C-32. | |
|
| | | | Re: Republicans in Canada Turns out that it is an "in camera" session. So behind closed doors things are being discussed. | |
|
| | | | I watched it and now I'm over my CAP... who do I send the bill to?
Happy to see that they are calling these clowns on their decision. This was classic
"Where did you get the number from .....?" - MP
"Why from Bell of course - they told us (what to write)" - Jackwagon from CRTC. | |
|
| | | XT0RTS3x, Drugs, War
join:2001-07-28
Edmonton, AB | Re: Republicans in Canada So let's what "Hitler" gave us in that session:
1. The majority of users only use 15GB of bandwidth in a month - Bullcrap.
2. "This only affects the heavy users". He doesn't know a single heavy user from a family that forgot to use birth control and have multiple computers and gaming consoles in the home. Both sides of that will use quite a bit of bandwidth.
3. Liberal MP: "Over 350,000 people signed a petition on OpenMedia rejecting the UBB proposal". "Hitler": "That's the power of the Internet". Obviously he doesn't give a crap about online petitions.
4. Bloc MP: "I just got Internet and I am a farmer. How does this affect me?" "Hitler": "I can't tell you that because I don't know what provider you are using and what your plan is." - Bullcrap, one of the big guys is selling the service to that person.
He made it really sound like Bell was the only company pushing this decision on the CRTC. I am more than sure that the others were part of that decision too.
Well, I hope Mr. Clement cracks the whip on this one. If not, it's election time my friends.
--
First the UBB, now let's wait for Bill C-32. | |
|
 fatnesssubtleJanitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:13
Bright House Netwo..
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help
| CRTC "reconsiders" plan that won't be implemented quote:
CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein says the commission will review its controversial decision to impose a usage cap on small Internet providers. The decision would ultimately filter down to consumers, whose negative reaction was swift across the country.
“The commission has decided to delay the implementation of usage-based billing for wholesale customers by at least 60 days,” Von Finckenstein told the Commons industry committee Thursday.
quote:
Industry Minister Tony Clement said he was pleased to hear the CTRC is reviewing its decision but added regardless of the outcome of that review the ruling will not be implemented.
»www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti···ers?bn=1 | |
|
| |
|
|
|  macedonJazz me babyPremium
join:2006-02-12
North York, ON | Re: Proud Canadian! #CRTC hearing on #UBB, watch the video: »bit.ly/g0DucS | |
|
|
|
gp
·
